Abstract
The Association for Psychological Science (APS) has begun Perspectives on Psychological Science to serve several missions. The overarching goal of the journal will be to publish outstanding articles that are larger and more integrative than those that appear in other APS publications. Perspectives will go to all members of APS, and therefore the articles will be written to be interesting to the full spectrum of scientific psychologists. Although articles will be invited, submitted manuscripts are strongly encouraged as well.
The journal will publish an eclectic mix of articles that are enjoyable to read and thought-provoking, and at the same time present the latest important advances in psychology. Articles that currently do not meet the format of existing journals are often published as chapters in scattered books, and therefore escape notice even when they are of high quality. One function of Perspectives is to make the best of these types of articles more readily accessible to a broad audience. Although lengthy articles will sometimes be published, authors are reminded that tightly written, lean articles are often most frequently read. The goal of Perspectives is for cutting-edge science to be communicated in a lively and interesting way that is understandable by all psychologists.
When APS contacted me about the possibility of editing the new journal, I jumped at the chance, despite the fact that I already had served as a journal editor for more than a decade. The journal is an exciting new development because of the diverse types of articles that will be published, and because it will encompass the entire field of psychology. Scientific disciplines are increasingly becoming splintered, with little communication between various disciplines and subdisciplines. Perspectives on Psychological Science represents a vehicle for all scientific psychologists to remain in touch with important developments across the discipline. Not only will the diverse areas of psychology be covered in the journal, but related areas in other behavioral and social sciences and neuroscience will be included as well. The fact that more than 15,000 scientists will receive the journal is another important strength of Perspectives. Although it will initially be a quarterly, the publication schedule is likely to become more frequent as the number of articles increases.
TYPES OF ARTICLES PUBLISHED
Standard or Meta-Analytic Review
Perspectives is a major outlet for review articles. Whether a review has the standard literary format or is meta-analytic, it should convey important conceptual conclusions. If a review article covers a relatively narrow area, the relevance to all psychologists should be evident.
Theoretical Article
Articles that advance theory will appear frequently in Perspectives. Theoretical articles should contain supportive data, and should be written in a manner that is lively and accessible to all scientific psychologists. Articles with clear relevance for psychology at large will be given preference.
Interrelated Articles Focused on a Common Topic
Several authors may write a set of interrelated articles that are all focused on a common topic, but from different viewpoints or subdisciplines. For example, the topic of hallucinations in schizophrenia might be discussed from biological, cultural, clinical, and developmental viewpoints. Similarly, an entire issue of the journal may be devoted to a set of interrelated articles. Working out a proposal in advance with the Editor is particularly desirable in the case of a set of articles.
Target Article Accompanied by Commentary
At times, an important and broad article that is accepted will clearly call for commentary from other authors. The Editor will seek commentaries after a discussion with the author. At other times, the author of a target article will already have sought and obtained articles that are designed to complement and expand on it, or reply to it, and the author will submit the set of articles as a group.
Overview of a Distinguished Research Program
Occasionally Perspectives will publish an overview of an outstanding research program that has been carried out over a number of years and presented across many publications. Such articles are appropriate when they convey to readers important insights into the scientific process, as well as information about the history of the field. Of course, such articles are likely to also include much content information about the field of study.
Report of a Programmatic Series of Empirical Studies
A report of a programmatic series of interrelated new studies focused on a particular question can be published in Perspectives. However, such a report must include conceptual advances and should emphasize theoretical development.
Biography or Autobiography
The journal will publish articles on renowned psychologists, or those who have led particularly interesting or informative lives. In a related vein, an article might describe some historical development in psychological science.
Thought or Opinion Article
The journal will publish articles that present an opinion or insight into some important aspect of the discipline. For instance, authors might comment about trends in the field, or might discuss a philosophical issue that challenges us. For example, for many years I wanted to write about evolving conceptions of causality, and what they mean for how we conduct and understand experimentation. However, there never seemed to be a good outlet where such an article might be read by active scientists. Perspectives is a potential outlet for high-quality articles of this type.
Article Presenting a New Idea
Martin E.P. Seligman has agreed to assist me in soliciting and editing articles in which new ideas are presented. Science advances in various ways—sometimes by a detailed, quantitative theory, sometimes by an interlocking set of controlled experiments, sometimes by a single startling discovery, and sometimes simply by a good idea. Perspectives will publish a very select few of the latter in short articles of no more than 1,000 words. An articulate discussion of an idea that reorganizes existing empirical findings and leads to surprising deductions that can be tested empirically will be a paradigm article. Usually, a manuscript of this nature will simply be accepted as is, with few revisions, or rejected.
Commissioned Article
We are searching for manuscripts on certain topics that are timely and important, and authors can propose articles in these areas. If the article is subsequently commissioned, it will be published if it passes through the external review process and is of high quality. Topics for commissionable articles will be posted on the journal's Web site, and suggestions for topics are welcome. Following are examples of current topics that would be of potential interest to the broad readership of this journal:
Placebos (discussion of the physiological effects of placebos that goes beyond the perceptions of symptoms and discusses measurable biological effects in immune, pain, and other systems) Empirically validated clinical treatments (current status and issues) Comparative cognition (thinking across species) Direct brain control of prosthetic devices, augmented cognition, and other topics related to the interface of brain and technology The possible disappearance of scholarly journals in the cybernetic era, and what might replace them The system for reviewing research ethics (comparison of risks with those in other domains of life, analysis of costs and the cost/benefit ratio of the current review system, suggestions for alternative methods or improvements) Brain geography mapping and resulting new psychological principles
Book Review
Occasionally a short book review will be published if the book promises to be important. Because of the publication lag of journal articles, a book review must be received very soon after the book appears in order to be useful to readers.
Humorous Article
On occasion psychologists write humorous pieces, and a few of these are of high enough quality and general interest to be publishable.
Review and Selection of Articles
Perspectives on Psychological Science does not compete with other APS journals, and therefore will not publish reports of single studies (these should be submitted to Psychological Science) or short overviews of a research area (these are appropriate for Current Directions in Psychological Science). Authors should consult the Editor about the suitability of a potential submission.
Many articles appearing in Perspectives will have been invited by the Editor. We have one of the most respected sets of Associate Editors ever assembled, and their role is primarily to search for potential articles for the journal. Some articles will be submitted, and submitted and invited articles will be reviewed in the same manner by outside reviewers. Authors who are considering submitting an article to Perspectives are encouraged to contact the Editor and discuss the idea. Indeed, even before an article is written, a summary can be sent to the Editor for feedback about the appropriateness of the article for the journal.
When a manuscript is submitted, it will be appraised for suitability for the journal, as well as for quality. In many cases, an article will be judged to be unsuitable, and the author will be notified quickly. Following the practice of journals such as Science, if an article is judged to be appropriate and of very high quality, it will be sent to outside reviewers, including members of the Editorial Board and reviewers suggested by the author. Every author is encouraged to submit a list of potential reviewers, along with their e-mail and postal addresses, as well as a description of their relationship to the author and to the material presented in the manuscript. All reviews are anonymous.
Reviewers are instructed to weigh heavily the degree to which an article advances science in important directions, rather than primarily add up all of the small shortcomings of the article. Thus, reviews will often be short and need not analyze articles in detail. Reviewers inform the Editor of the strengths and weaknesses of a submission, as well as of their view of the overall contribution of the article. It is the Editor's responsibility to make “accept” and “reject” decisions. Such decisions are not based on a vote by reviewers, and the judgment of the Editor may diverge from the evaluations of a majority of reviewers.
Among the criteria used to judge suitability for publication are the following:
The article is important, presenting information that will be significant to a large proportion of scientific psychologists. The contribution to the discipline of psychology should be substantial, or the article ought to be extremely interesting. The article presents new material, not information that appeared recently in broad outlets. If the authors have recently published similar articles, a strong case must be made as to why the submitted manuscript goes beyond the earlier work in an important way. The manuscript is written in a way that is understandable and interesting to scientific psychologists across the entire range of subdisciplines within psychology. The manuscript presents creative new insights. Although rigor in reasoning and data is valued, Perspectives on Psychological Science is a journal in which authors may take risks. We do not want to ignore potentially important ideas just because definitive data are not yet available. This means that the journal might publish a few more “false positives” than other journals, but also that there will be fewer “false negatives” owing to conservative views of what is publishable. There is no other major journal outlet for an article of this type. Although this is not a requirement for publication in this journal, we especially want to provide work that otherwise might be published in obscure outlets a chance for exposure to a wide readership. We want to be alert for strong and unusual articles for which Perspectives is likely to be the only major journal outlet. The article does not overlap substantially with others that have recently appeared in the journal. That is, we seek variety in our articles, and therefore will make an effort not to overrepresent a particular field or issue.
There was a time when reviewers could carefully read submissions and offer authors very detailed feedback. Given the heavy load of submissions to most journals nowadays, reviewers are overburdened. Because we want the very best scientists to review manuscripts for us, we tell reviewers that an overall impression is sufficient if they cannot afford to spend the time needed for a more detailed review. First and foremost, we want the expert judgment of reviewers on the importance and rigor of every submission. Because our threshold for publication is high, it is expected that many reviews will be short, and simply state whether the manuscript does or does not clear this hurdle. If a reviewer feels that a revision of the manuscript is publishable, he or she can offer general suggestions for improvement. Thus, brief reviews should not be interpreted to mean that a manuscript was not evaluated seriously.
SPECIFIC JOURNAL POLICIES
Repeated Revisions
Many journals now make it necessary to go through many rounds of revisions before they publish an article. Both the editor and reviewers make numerous and detailed suggestions for revisions, and over successive revisions new reviewers are often brought in and provide even more suggestions for revisions. Essentially, publication is often based on trial-by-revision, and is a test of whether the author can persevere. Further, the editor and reviewers in a sense become co-authors of the article. The aim at Perspectives is to make any substantial improvements that are needed, but not to rewrite details according to the wishes of the reviewers. If a submission has too many weaknesses, it will be rejected. If there are general ways the manuscript can be improved, those will be conveyed to the author. However, rarely will authors be required to make scores of changes over multiple revisions in order to publish an article.
Submission by the Journal Editors
In my view, it is unfair to editors to prevent their publishing in the journal with which they are affiliated. If the editors are automatically precluded from publishing in Perspectives, it is likely that the journal will be edited by individuals who are no longer active in scientific discovery. Furthermore, the very best scientists will be hesitant to become editors of top journals if they will then not be allowed to publish in those journals. At the same time, issues of conflict of interest and objectivity become paramount when editors seek to publish in the journals they edit. Thus, in the case of Perspectives, a guest editor who is highly respected and a senior person in the field will be assigned to a manuscript submitted by one of the journal's editors. The guest editor should be an individual who will make an objective and independent decision about the manuscript, based on outside reviews that he or she obtains, and be uninfluenced by the status of the editor-author.
Controversial Ideas and Replies
The Editorial Board will take risks in publishing new ideas and findings. Controversial articles will be published, and articles on the other side of the controversy might appear subsequently. We will not censor articles on ideological grounds, but believe that truth emerges from scientific debate and the collection of data. Naturally, all ideas, including controversial ones, should be presented with the appropriate scientific caveats and limitations clearly expressed. When readers disagree with controversial articles that appear, their best response will be based on data that contradict the controversial conclusions. Thus, a response to an earlier article will most likely be published if it presents firm evidence that counters the conclusions of the target article.
SUBMISSIONS WELCOMED
The journal welcomes submissions from both junior and senior authors. Although the threshold for publication is high, it is expected that exciting articles will come from young investigators, as well as from our renowned colleagues. After all, less well-established scientists often come up with creative new ideas and conduct a significant proportion of the most innovative research. I hope to publish your most creative and best work here, and I am optimistic that Perspectives is a journal that people will read.